Organiser Vs PFI: Victorious legacy continues

Resolute in its commitment to truth, Organiser refused to yield and stood its ground even in the midst of threats from powerful Congress leaders to suppress dissent and free speech. This legacy of fearless journalism has been persevered even during turbulent times, unwavering in its dedication to upholding democratic values. On the occasion of its 75th anniversary, Organiser reached yet another milestone, cementing its role as a beacon of journalistic integrity and legal advocacy in the defence of Freedom of Speech. Rejecting PFI’s Defamation On November 26, the Kerala High Court delivered a landmark judgement quashing the criminal prosecution and defamation proceedings initiated against Organiser by a lower court at the behest of the banned Islamic terrorist outfit, the Popular Front of India (PFI). Rejecting the arguments presented by the respondents on behalf of the PFI, the court firmly held that a defamation complaint from a proscribed organisation has no legal standing. As Malkani Ji famously wrote in his editorial celebrating his legal triumph over the Nehruvian regime’s draconian censorship in 1950, “Our freedom marks the guaranteeing of the freedom of the entire press of the nation” The petition (Bharat Prakashan (Delhi) Ltd & Ors Vs CP Mohammed Basheer & Anr) was filed by the Editors, printer, publisher and management of Bharat Prakashan (Delhi) Limited, the entity responsible for publishing Organiser. The case revolved around the article titled “The Usual Suspect,” published on September 17, 2017, which had come under scrutiny for its bold exposé on PFI’s terrorist activities. Exposing Menace of Love Jihad The article titled “The Usual Suspect,” part of the cover story “Veiled Jihad,” sought to elevate the issue of “Love Jihad” to national prominence. Based on investigation reports and other sources, it presented compelling evidence linking the PFI to Love Jihad, along with fresh allegations against the organisation—findings that were subsequently picked up by other print and visual media outlets. Link with Terrorists The article provided a brief historical account of Islamic fundamentalism in the post-Jamaat-e-Islami era. It also enumerated the crimes of the PFI, including its involvement in the recruitment of terrorists in Jammu and Kashmir in 2008, the Bengaluru serial blasts, the brutal hand-chopping of Prof. TJ Joseph over alleged blasphemy, the Marad massacre, and its participation in over 29 murders and 87 attempted murders, among other heinous acts. It played a pivotal role in influencing the Union Government’s eventual decision to impose a ban on the organisation. Drawing on highly credible sources and the Home Ministry dossiers, the report also unveiled the identities of PFI’s real leadership, operating discreetly behind the scenes. The PFI deliberately sought to keep its true leadership concealed from the public eye, shielding them behind a facade of shadow leaders. However, when the article unveiled the involvement of former SIMI leaders—EM Abdu Rahiman, Prof P Koya, E Aboobecker, P Abdul Hameed, and K Muhammed Ali—operating from behind the scenes, the organisation was thrown into disarray. The organisation rightly perceived it as a dire warning for the group, as all individuals named in the report are now detained in Tihar Jail following the PFI’s ban. Quoting a Home Ministry dossier, the report said that the PFI had an estimated 60,000 active members and 85,000 sympathisers in Kerala alone, with an annual growth rate of three to five per cent. These figures underscore the significant reach and rapid expansion of the organisation, further validating the gravity of the disclosures. What Provoked PFI? The PFI enjoyed significant favour from the media in Kerala, flourishing since its inception. The organisation maintained a pervasive influence, with agents embedded in nearly all media outlets, political parties, and social organisations. Quoting a Home Ministry dossier, the report said that the PFI had an estimated 60,000 active members and 85,000 sympathisers in Kerala alone, with an annual growth rate of three to 5 per cent The media strategy of SIMI, NDF, and PFI followed a consistent pattern: either winning over journalists through appeasement or coercing them through intimidation. Allegations had surfaced that multiple media organisations and journalists were financially supported by the PFI, many of whom continued to vocally endorse the group even after its legal prohibition. Evidently, several journalists collaborated closely with the PFI, particularly during the anti-CAA riots. When attempts at appeasement failed, the PFI resorted to intimidation tactics, particularly targeting pro-nationalist media in Kerala that published critical articles about them. Central to this strategy was a dedicated legal cell, meticulously designed to exert pressure on media houses. By swiftly issuing legal notices, the PFI effectively stifled dissenting voices and ensured that no incriminating evidence about their activities remained in the public domain. This strategy often compelled media outlets to retract reports, issue public apologies, or both. Several prominent media platforms fell victim to this calculated approach. The same tactics of intimidation were directed at Organiser following the publication of “The Usual Suspect,” underscoring the PFI’s relentless efforts to suppress narratives that exposed their covert operations. Citing a source from the Home Ministry, the article had disclosed that Salafi organisations in Malappuram had received Rs.150 crore from a single donor in Qatar. It also exposed the covert operations of Sathya Sarani, a PFI-run conversion center in Malappuram. Seven years later, in October 2024, the Enforcement Directorate (ED) corroborated these findings, leading to the confiscation of Sathya Sarani. Notably, in 2021, a Turkish NGO, IHH, served a legal notice to Organiser following its exclusive report on a meeting between IHH representatives and PFI leaders. The article, published on November 16, 2020—two years before the Islamist group’s ban—detailed IHH’s connections with global Islamic terrorist organizations like Hamas. Later, our investigations revealed that the PFI orchestrated this legal action, using the IHH as a proxy to target Organiser Weekly and discredit its reporting. Implications of the Verdict From the legal point of view, this judgement stands as a significant landmark in the cases pertaining to criminal defamation and Freedom of Speech. It should be considered a victory for the media’s role in upholding truth and transparency, underscoring that [...]